Trump’s lawyer confirms his concern about Supreme Court ballot ruling

by Miranda Nazzaro - 01/03/24 5:13 PM ET

Former President Trump’s attorney Alina Habba on Wednesday said the former president is concerned the U.S. Supreme Court justices may “shy away from being pro-Trump,” and rule against him in regard to the recent decisions in Colorado and Maine that kicked him off the states’ 2024 primary ballots.

Responding to New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman’s recent comments about Trump’s concerns, Habba during an interview on Fox News said, “That’s a concern he’s voiced to me, he’s voiced to everybody publicly, not privately. And I can tell you that his concern is a valid one.”

“You know, Republicans are conservative, they get nervous. They unfortunately … sometimes shy away from being pro-Trump because they feel that even if the law is on our side, they are swayed much like the Democratic side, right?” Habba told Fox News anchor Martha MacCallum. “So they’re trying so hard to look neutral that sometimes, they make the wrong call.”

Colorado and Maine both removed Trump from their 2024 state primary ballots last month, ruling he is ineligible to run for president under the 14th Amendment’s insurrection clause.

Related coverage from The Hill

Trump on Wednesday appealed Colorado’s ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, one day after he appealed Maine’s decision — which came from Maine’s Secretary of State Shenna Bellows — in the state’s superior court, though the dispute could ultimately also reach the U.S. Supreme Court, which currently has a 6-3 conservative majority.

Three of the justices on the nation’s highest bench were appointed by Trump, a point of concern Haberman addressed last week.

“They believe, generally speaking, he and his advisers, that they will have success at the Supreme Court, but he has also voiced some concern that a court that has — he appointed three of the justices at the Supreme Court and gave the conservatives a supermajority — he is concerned that they are going to look as if they’re trying not to rule in his favor and might rule against him,” Haberman said during a CNN appearance last week.

Habba on Wednesday said she encourages the justices to “really look at the law in the Constitution.”

“It’s a very clean cut,” she said. “There’s no … politics that should be involved in this. It’s just simply American, and if the justices read the law, as I do, as most Americans and attorneys do, even [Alan Dershowitz] — who’s a known liberal — it’s just a simple decision, and it should have nothing to do with if you’re Republican or Democrat.”

Habba was making an apparent reference to attorney Alan Dershowitz’s comments against rulings from Colorado and Maine. Dershowitz last month called Colorado’s decision “an attempt to totally manipulate an amendment that was never designed to disqualify people in future election,” Forbes reported.

A number of legal experts have thrown out varying predictions for how the nation’s highest court could rule if it decides to hear the case. Former Attorney General Bill Barr called Colorado’s case “legally wrong and untenable,” while former federal Judge Michael Luttig said the Centennial State’s ruling is not “anti-democratic,” but rather the conduct that prompted the disqualification was anti-democratic.

Former White House lawyer Ty Cobb predicted the U.S. Supreme Court could rule “9-0” in favor of Trump if he appeals the Colorado Supreme Court decision, saying last month he believes the “law is clear.”